Nov 27, 2006

Archive

Send

Seehofer: Key issues for the Genetic Engineering Act

Coalition argues about genetic engineering law

After long discussions, Germany’s agriculture minister, Horst Seehofer, has presented key issues for amendments and additions to Germany’s Genetic Engineering Act. He has evidently succeeded in resolving most of his differences with the research minister, Anette Schavan. The draft ‘key issues paper’ is said to contain toned-down liability risk provisions for scientific field trials with GM plants. However, the two ministries have evidently not yet come to an agreement on minimum distances between conventional and GM maize crops. The SPD, the government coalition partner, has announced that it will be opposing the Seehofer plans.

In their coalition agreement, the CDU/CSU and SPD agreed that they would revise genetic engineering law with the aim of “promoting research and use in Germany”. One of the things the government wanted to do was amend the Genetic Engineering Act (GenTG) currently in force. In addition, the agriculture minister, Horst Seehofer (CSU), had announced that he would be submitting rules of good farming practice for the cultivation of genetically modified maize. According to press reports, the agriculture minister and has now agreed on a key issues paper for both projects with the research minister, Annette Schavan (CDU). It is reported that the paper is due to be passed by the cabinet before the end of December if possible.

Liability risks reduced for field research

Several newspapers have reported that the main changes in the key issues paper make things easier for field research. Conventional harvest products that contain traces of GMOs tested in the field could be put to commercial use, but not as food or feed. Farmers could, for instance, use them to generate bioenergy. Claims for compensation for such GMO contamination from trial fields in conventional harvest produce would be allowed only from the immediate neighbours. In the case of field trials funded with public money, any liability claims would be met from tax revenues.

By contrast, the ministry of agriculture (BMELV) evidently plans to make very few changes to the liability provisions for commercial farming. The joint and several liability without fault for commercial losses, which has been criticised by farming and biotechnology associations, is set to remain. However, the Act should specify that only GMO presence over and above the labelling threshold of 0.9% requires compensation. For cases in which the GM farmer concerned cannot be shown to be at fault, Seehofer is hoping for a voluntary self-commitment declaration from the seed industry.

Public site register with fewer details

Changes to the site register are also planned. Under the current Genetic Engineering Act, the publicly accessible part of the register contains the precise coordinates of all plots on which GM plants are grown. In future this part of the register will show only the district. However, farmers who grow GM plants must inform their neighbours of the fact.

Separation distances remain undecided

A minimum distance to be respected between transgenic and conventional maize crops will be a key element of good farming practice for the cultivation of GM maize. However, Seehofer and Schavan have so far been unable to agree on the separation distance. While Seehofer wants to introduce a minimum separation distance of 150 metres, the research ministry believes 50 metres is sufficient. The expert opinions at a hearing in the agricultural committee at the end of October were also very divided on this point. If maize on neighbouring fields is grown as a renewable raw material, e.g. for biogas plants, there could be no need for a separation distance.

Coalition partner disgruntled

Prompt opposition to some of the content of the key issues paper came from the coalition partner SPD. The vice-chairman of the SPD group of the Bundestag, Ulrich Kelber, is reported to have declared: “We cannot accept the key issues in this form.” Among other things, Kelber criticises Seehofer’s proposal of compensating only the immediate neighbours of research fields. He also rejects the fact that the liability provisions will apply only from the labelling threshold of 0.9%, saying that farmers could suffer losses from lower levels of GMO contamination.

The paper was also criticised by the opposition. The FDP group’s genetic engineering expert, Christel Happach-Kasan, complained that Seehofer and the SPD were refusing the comprehensive revision of the Genetic Engineering Act agreed in the coalition agreement, with provisions to make things easier for research and cultivation, and were thereby preventing the creation of innovative jobs. By contrast, Die Grünen, the German green party, believes the 150m minimum distance under discussion is insufficient.

In view of the disagreements within the coalition, the revised legislation is extremely unlikely to be passed before the 2007 sowing season.